Why The Marine Corps Is Locked In A Crazy Battle With The Navy Over Camouflage

Military combat uniforms have two purposes: to camouflage
soldiers, and to hold together in rugged conditions.

It stands to reason that there's only one "best" pattern, and one
best stitching and manufacture. It should follow that when such a
uniform is developed, the entire military should transition to
it.

In 2002, the Marine Corps adopted a digital camouflage pattern
called MARPAT. Rigorous field-testing proved that it was more
effective than the splotched woodland pattern in use at the time,
and the Combat Utility Uniform (of which it was a part) was a
striking change for such a conservative institution.

Not to be outdone, the Army drew up digital plans of its own, and
in 2005 issued a redesigned combat uniform in a "universal
camouflage pattern" (UCP). Three years after the Marines made the
change, four years after the invasion of Afghanistan, and two
years after the invasion of Iraq, you might think the Army would
have been loaded with data on how best to camouflage soldiers in
known combat zones. You would be wrong.

In fact, not only did the Army dismiss the requirements of the
operating environments, but it also literally chose the poorest
performing pattern of its field tests. The "universal" in UCP
refers to jungle, desert, and urban environments. In designing a
uniform for wear in every environment, it designed a uniform that
was effective in none.

As for durability, not long after the Army combat uniform
appeared in Iraq, soldiers discovered that the uniform's crotch
seams were prone to
ripping open on the battlefield. Rather than fix the problem,
however, the Army simply shipped more boxes of defective uniforms
to supply sergeants. Stitching techniques were revisited the
following year, and in 2007, uniforms already in circulation were
tailored to compensate for the frustrating and distracting
deficiency.

As it would turn out, MultiCam—a pattern that the Army had
originally passed over in favor of the universal pattern—was
discovered to work quite well in Afghanistan. The Army began
issuing MultiCam combat uniforms to
deployed soldiers, but continued (and continues to this day)
peddling universal pattern combat uniforms to soldiers
stateside—a combat uniform that will never again be used in
combat.

Such dysfunction is not unique to the Army. MARPAT was a success
not only in function, but also in adding distinction to the
Marines wearing it. Naturally the Air Force wanted in on that
action, and set about to make its own mark on the camouflage
world. Its first choice? A Vietnam-era blue
tiger-stripe pattern. (You know, to blend in with the trees
on Pandora.)

After an outcry in the ranks, the leadership settled on a color
scheme slightly more subdued. The new uniform did, however, have
the benefit of being "winter
weight" only, which was just perfect for service in Iraq.

The Marine Corps has remained loyal to the effective MARPAT, and
rightfully so. But when the Navy decided to migrate to a digital
pattern three years ago, it chose a desert scheme a few shades
too close to that of the Marines, and the Corps balked. The Navy
has since
restricted its digital desert pattern to Special Warfare
units. (The Marine Corps has also warned
the Army against infringing on its design.) Essentially, the
branches of the U.S. military are now engaged in the same
intellectual property battle as Google and Apple.

To make matters worse, the new Navy Working Uniform has been
found to be highly flammable, and "will burn robustly" if exposed
to fire. In fact, it turns into a "sticky
molten material."

Nobody expects the military to make smart financial decisions.
While the six-hundred-dollar hammer was a myth, such boondoggles
as the F-35 joint strike fighter are very real. And while it is
the world's best jet for fighting Transformers or supporting Iron
Man, it is the worst for modern, non-computer-generated
battlefields. (The Air Force isn't exactly flying a lot of
sorties against the Taliban fighter jets.)

But everyone should expect and demand that the Defense Department
purchase durable combat uniforms printed with the most effective
camouflage pattern. Only the galactic stupidity of the Pentagon
would allow inferior concealment in the name of public relations
and marketing, which is what this uniform arms race amounts to.
Each branch wants its members to have a distinct appearance, and
there's nothing wrong with that. Such matters should, however, be
confined to dress uniforms. As a matter of camouflage in hostile
areas, a standard combat uniform across the branches is the only
sane option.

From a financial perspective, it makes sense as well. Four combat
uniforms require distinct accouterments and gear, to say nothing
of manufacturing times and transportation overseas. If standards
are an issue, I'll offer a baseline: a pattern that blends into
the relevant operating environment; stitching that doesn't rip at
the crotch; material that doesn't melt onto the skin. And the
Pentagon should leave the embarrassing copyright battles to the
smartphone industry. I'd like to think the United States military
has more pressing things to worry about.